IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/kue/epaper/e-19-006.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Effect of Information Provision on Stated and Revealed Preferences:A Field Experiment on the Choice of Power Tariffs Before and After Japanese Retail Electricity Liberalization

Author

Listed:
  • Takunori ISHIHARA
  • Takanori IDA

Abstract

This paper examines differences in attitudes towards electricity fee plans when information is provided on electricity bills based on past electricity consumption. We conducted randomized controlled trial stated preference (SP) and revealed preference (RP) experiments on the choice of electricity rates before and after liberalization. In the SP experiment, we measured participants' valuations of their electricity pricing plans. We found that providing information about the participants' benefit from switching diminished the tendency towards overconfidence. The valuation decreases substantially, when information is provided showing that a loss will be incurred from switching. The results of the RP and SP experiments differ. We found that the selection was not changed in the RP experiment, even when providing information that a loss would be incurred.

Suggested Citation

  • Takunori ISHIHARA & Takanori IDA, 2019. "The Effect of Information Provision on Stated and Revealed Preferences:A Field Experiment on the Choice of Power Tariffs Before and After Japanese Retail Electricity Liberalization," Discussion papers e-19-006, Graduate School of Economics , Kyoto University.
    • Handle: RePEc:kue:epaper:e-19-006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.kyoto-u.ac.jp/dp/papers/e-19-006.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:mpr:mprres:7375 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Kalle Seip & Jon Strand, 1992. "Willingness to pay for environmental goods in Norway: A contingent valuation study with real payment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 2(1), pages 91-106, January.
    3. Markus M. Möbius & Muriel Niederle & Paul Niehaus & Tanya S. Rosenblat, 2022. "Managing Self-Confidence: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(11), pages 7793-7817, November.
    4. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.
    5. Thunström, Linda & Nordström, Jonas & Shogren, Jason F., 2015. "Certainty and overconfidence in future preferences for food," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 101-113.
    6. Jeffrey R. Kling & Sendhil Mullainathan & Eldar Shafir & Lee C. Vermeulen & Marian V. Wrobel, 2012. "Comparison Friction: Experimental Evidence from Medicare Drug Plans," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 127(1), pages 199-235.
    7. Shin, Kong Joo & Managi, Shunsuke, 2017. "Liberalization of a retail electricity market: Consumer satisfaction and household switching behavior in Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 675-685.
    8. Murakami, Kayo & Ida, Takanori & Tanaka, Makoto & Friedman, Lee, 2015. "Consumers' willingness to pay for renewable and nuclear energy: A comparative analysis between the US and Japan," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 178-189.
    9. Raymond S. Hartman & Michael J. Doane & Chi-Keung Woo, 1991. "Consumer Rationality and the Status Quo," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(1), pages 141-162.
    10. Brad M. Barber & Terrance Odean, 2001. "Boys will be Boys: Gender, Overconfidence, and Common Stock Investment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(1), pages 261-292.
    11. Koichiro Ito, 2014. "Do Consumers Respond to Marginal or Average Price? Evidence from Nonlinear Electricity Pricing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(2), pages 537-563, February.
    12. Steven Sexton, 2015. "Automatic Bill Payment and Salience Effects: Evidence from Electricity Consumption," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(2), pages 229-241, May.
    13. Amy Finkelstein, 2009. "E-ztax: Tax Salience and Tax Rates," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 124(3), pages 969-1010.
    14. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521747387, January.
    15. Marianne Bertrand & Adair Morse, 2011. "Information Disclosure, Cognitive Biases, and Payday Borrowing," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 66(6), pages 1865-1893, December.
    16. Bhat, Chandra R., 2001. "Quasi-random maximum simulated likelihood estimation of the mixed multinomial logit model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 677-693, August.
    17. Thomas C. Brown & Patricia A. Champ & Richard C. Bishop & Daniel W. McCollum, 1996. "Which Response Format Reveals the Truth about Donations to a Public Good?," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(2), pages 152-166.
    18. Ali Hortaçsu & Seyed Ali Madanizadeh & Steven L. Puller, 2017. "Power to Choose? An Analysis of Consumer Inertia in the Residential Electricity Market," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 192-226, November.
    19. David Eil & Justin M. Rao, 2011. "The Good News-Bad News Effect: Asymmetric Processing of Objective Information about Yourself," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 114-138, May.
    20. Richard T. Carson & Nicholas E. Flores & Kerry M. Martin & Jennifer L. Wright, 1996. "Contingent Valuation and Revealed Preference Methodologies: Comparing the Estimates for Quasi-Public Goods," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 72(1), pages 80-99.
    21. Heger, Stephanie A. & Papageorge, Nicholas W., 2018. "We should totally open a restaurant: How optimism and overconfidence affect beliefs," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 177-190.
    22. Xiaoping He & David Reiner, 2017. "Why Consumers Switch Energy Suppliers: The Role of Individual Attitudes," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 6).
    23. Giné, Xavier & Mazer, Rafael Keenan, 2022. "Financial (dis-)information: Evidence from a multi-country audit study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    24. Ertac, Seda, 2011. "Does self-relevance affect information processing? Experimental evidence on the response to performance and non-performance feedback," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 532-545.
    25. Emir Kamenica & Sendhil Mullainathan & Richard Thaler, 2011. "Helping Consumers Know Themselves," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(3), pages 417-422, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Meles, Tensay Hadush & Lokina, Razack & Mtenga, Erica Louis & Tibanywana, Julieth Julius, 2023. "Stated preferences with survey consequentiality and outcome uncertainty: A split sample discrete choice experiment," EfD Discussion Paper 23-16, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alejandro Ponce & Enrique Seira & Guillermo Zamarripa, 2017. "Borrowing on the Wrong Credit Card? Evidence from Mexico," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1335-1361, April.
    2. Lang, Ghislaine & Farsi, Mehdi & Lanz, Bruno & Weber, Sylvain, 2021. "Energy efficiency and heating technology investments: Manipulating financial information in a discrete choice experiment," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    3. Alberini, Anna & Bezhanishvili, Levan & Ščasný, Milan, 2022. "“Wild” tariff schemes: Evidence from the Republic of Georgia," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    4. Nolan Ritter & Julia Anna Bingler, 2021. "Do homo sapiens know their prices? Insights on dysfunctional price mechanisms from a large field experiment," CER-ETH Economics working paper series 21/348, CER-ETH - Center of Economic Research (CER-ETH) at ETH Zurich.
    5. Singhal, Puja, 2024. "Inform me when it matters: Cost salience, energy consumption, and efficiency investments," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    6. Houde, Sébastien & Myers, Erica, 2021. "Are consumers attentive to local energy costs? Evidence from the appliance market," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    7. Paul D. Adams & Stefan Hunt & Christopher Palmer & Redis Zaliauskas, 2019. "Testing the Effectiveness of Consumer Financial Disclosure: Experimental Evidence from Savings Accounts," NBER Working Papers 25718, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Alberini, Anna & Khymych, Olha & Ščasný, Milan, 2020. "Responsiveness to energy price changes when salience is high: Residential natural gas demand in Ukraine," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    9. Lee, Deborah E. & Du Preez, Mario, 2016. "Determining visitor preferences for rhinoceros conservation management at private, ecotourism game reserves in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa: A choice modeling experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 106-116.
    10. Gary Charness & Aldo Rustichini & Jeroen Ven, 2018. "Self-confidence and strategic behavior," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(1), pages 72-98, March.
    11. Anton Suvorov & Jeroen van de Ven & Marie Claire Villeval, 2024. "Selective Information Sharing and Group Delusion," Working Papers 2405, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    12. Ericson, Keith M. Marzilli & Starc, Amanda, 2016. "How product standardization affects choice: Evidence from the Massachusetts Health Insurance Exchange," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 71-85.
    13. Wichman, Casey J., 2017. "Information provision and consumer behavior: A natural experiment in billing frequency," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 13-33.
    14. Markus M. Möbius & Muriel Niederle & Paul Niehaus & Tanya S. Rosenblat, 2022. "Managing Self-Confidence: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(11), pages 7793-7817, November.
    15. Katherine Coffman & Maria Paola Ugalde Araya & Basit Zafar, 2024. "A (dynamic) investigation of stereotypes, belief‐updating, and behavior," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 62(3), pages 957-983, July.
    16. Bobba, Matteo & Frisancho, Veronica, 2022. "Self-perceptions about academic achievement: Evidence from Mexico City," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 58-73.
    17. Hindriks, Jean & Serse, Valerio, 2022. "The incidence of VAT reforms in electricity markets: Evidence from Belgium," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    18. Kesternich, Iris & Heiss, Florian & McFadden, Daniel & Winter, Joachim, 2013. "Suit the action to the word, the word to the action: Hypothetical choices and real decisions in Medicare Part D," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1313-1324.
    19. Kocourek, Pavel & Steiner, Jakub & Stewart, Colin, 2024. "Boundedly rational demand," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 19(4), November.
    20. Banerjee, Ritwik & Gupta, Nabanita Datta & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2020. "Feedback spillovers across tasks, self-confidence and competitiveness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 127-170.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Randomized controlled trial (RCT); Stated preference; Revealed preference; Information provision; Power tariff; Overconfidence.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • Q49 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Other

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kue:epaper:e-19-006. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Graduate School of Economics Project Center (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fekyojp.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.